the field of operations, and but partially, or not at all, acquainted with the actual condition of things" (Maxims, p. 59).
18. There was probably some basis for certain of Santa Anna's charges against the American troops. Scott allowed a day to pass, it was said, in order to enable Americans in town to get away. Ripley (op. cit., ii, 352) says this was done to allow unarmed inhabitants to do so. But it was good policy to prevent such persons from leaving, and such had been Scott's course at Vera Cruz (chap. xxii, p. 32). Naturally Santa Anna wavered back and forth, and Trist believed that at about three o'clock, Sept. 5, he almost decided to accept the American terms (Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 251).
19. The termination of the armistice. Sen. 52; 30, 1, pp. 195-203, 231-66 (Trist); 307, 346, etc. 52Trist to Buchanan, no. 15, confid., Sept.4. Sen.20; 30,1, pp. 9,14. Contestaciones Habidas (1847), 22, 26, 28, 30, 34. Picayune, Oct. 16. Sen.1; 30, 1, pp. 354, 360. 303H. L. Scott to Quitman, Aug. 31. National, Nov. 14. Hitchcock, Fifty Years, 291 — 4. Haynes, Gen. Scott's Guide. 217Henshaw to wife, Sept. 13. London Times, Nov. 13. Sen. 34; 34, 3, pp. 21, 37-9. Ho. 40; 30, 1. 291 Pierce to wife, Aug. 23. Lawton, Artill. Officer, 309. 335Trist to Thornton, confid., Nov. 24 (the Americans kept the armistice faithfully). 335 Memo. in Spanish, Aug.. Semmes, Service, 415. Sen. 11; 31, 1 (Hardcastle). 80Relaciones to Olaguíbel, Aug. 31, res.; Sept. 6, 8. 73 Lozano, no. 7, Sept. 16. Negrete, Invasión, il, app., 448. 92Tornel to Mex. ayunt., Aug. 30. 187Thomas to Eddy, Aug. 26. N. Y. Sun, Oct. 5. Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 67. Ramsey, Other Side, 330, note. And from 76 the following (chiefly showing orders contrary to the armistice). To Alvarez, Aug. 28. Tornel, Aug. 27, very res.; Sept. 3. Bravo, Sept. 5. Acuerdos, Sept. 3,4 Orders to Tenth Infantry, Aug. 28. To govs. Puebla and four other states, Sept. 6. To govs. México, Guanajuato, Jalisco, Sept.. To Relaciones, Aug. 27. S. Anna, proclam., Sept. 7.
20. The armistice as viewed in the United States. Sen. 52; 30, 1, pp. 138 (Marcy); 231 (Trist, no. 22). Sen. 20; 30, 1, p. 14 (Trist). Apuntes, 278-9. Polk, Diary, Feb. 7, 19; Mar. 16, 1848. London Times, Oct. 29. Ramírez, México, 241. Polk, Message, Dec. 7, 1847 (Richardson, iv, 536). 13Crampton, no. 42, Oct. 18. Wash. Union, Oct. 4-6. 256 Marcy to Wetmore, Oct. 21. 58Jones to Polk, May 2. Negrete, Invasión, ili, app., 448. 354Welles papers. 191Fairfield to wife, Jan. 10. N. Y. Herald, Dec. 15. Monitor Repub., Dec. 21. Baltimore Sun, Oct. 5. Ho. 69; 30, 1, p. 56 (Buchanan). 335Buchanan to Trist, Oct. 24-5, 1847.
It has been said with truth that the war was waged on the theory that Texas extended to the Rio Grande, but the United States could have neutralized (and this is the most that was considered by Trist: Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 258) the region between that river and the Nueces without implying in the least that our claim to it had not been valid. The fact that Santa Anna and Pacheco thought that an extension of the armistice would benefit the Americans (ibid., 260) is a striking, though by no means the only, answer to Polk's charge that it would have been greatly to our disadvantage (ibid., 259). Ramírez (México, 241) pointed out that inaction was bad for the Mexicans, since they lacked funds to support troops long. Santa Anna could not materially increase his army after Sept. 1, and he subsisted it with extreme difficulty (Sen. 52; 30, 1, pp. 259-60). The armistice in general was regarded by the Mexicans as an American trick.
